Re: CIA & FBI, a marriage made in ___?

[Blanc Weber <blancw@microsoft.com>]

From: Black Unicorn

" What is important, and a point
on which I think we agree, is that the regulation of strong crypto, or in
your definition, the interference in the marketplace, is unacceptable,
unneeded and nothing more than a calculated attempt to maintain the
status quo of usurpation of individual rights in favor of federal power
and influence.  Even the national security externality falls when one
considers the uselessness of export regulation in the age of digital
communication."
.....................................................

Okay, last word from me on any of this, and only because it relates
to the above;  the quote below is from a newsletter I just recently
received (Imprimis, from Hillsdale College, by Richard Duesenberg of
the Monsanto Company):

"While there are indications that the [Supreme] Court might be
resuming some sensitivity to property (e.g., under the takings
clause) the deference it gives to legislative action is still
near-absolute.  If a law or regulation simply stresses "urgent need"
or "the public interest", the Court is sure to let it stand.  The
judicial review process is so biased that only the most absurd edicts
are found unconstitutional.

Legal scholar Bernard Siegan has noted that this bias has led to the
impeding of the democratic process.  If the Court refuses to review
the legitimacy of economic regulation, then the government is
essentially free to dominate the entire American business community
and, indeed, the life of every American citizen.
. . . .
Even more alarming is the loss of freedom that has accompanied
growing involvement in our affairs.  But freedom is valueless to the
government planner.  He requires coercive force in order to have his
way, and he regards centralized planning as far superior to the
untidy, unpredictable actions and decisions of free men and women."

Blanc